mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,083
You are correct. That is peak power readings you are seeing that rise and fall very quickly.
How much power (wpc) is more than enough for most speakers and systems?
- Thread starter bluegrassphile
- Start date
You are correct. That is peak power readings you are seeing that rise and fall very quickly.
Mr Peabody
Well-known member
Yes sir, I know any speaker with efficiency in the mid 80's would need a big amp for my listening habits, LOL
jdandy
New member
Yesterday, just for fun, I spent several hours playing music on the living room sound system while paying close attention to the McIntosh MC452 meters set to peak hold. I was interested in discovering my typical amplifier demands at an enjoyable volume level, one that you would have to turn down a bit to have a comfortable conversation. The average peak power driving the 4 ohm PMC EB1i speakers with an efficiency of 89dB/1W/1M was just under 10 watts, and often around 4.5 watts. If I turned up the volume where peaks averaged 45 watts, the living room was rocking loud. 95% of my listening with the living room system falls into the category of less than 10 watts peak, and often lower. With the MC452 power amplifier (450 watts continuous per channel) I have a substantial amount of unused power on tap that is unnecessary.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
That sounds about right Dan. Even though I do not have the meters to prove it, I know that the T+A, at 80 WPC, is never ever being stressed in even what I consider loud listening sessions...
When do you get the 75 monos? I bet they will work beautifully for you!
jdandy
New member
Randy.......My McIntosh dealer is delivering a pair of MC75 amplifiers this coming Tuesday afternoon. I am excited to get them into the living room system.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
Awesome Dan, and gratz! I am sure you will enjoy the performance of those monoblocks!
Randy.......My McIntosh dealer is delivering a pair of MC75 amplifiers this coming Tuesday afternoon. I am excited to get them into the living room system.
Dan, a comparison with your current mono blocks in the works?
jdandy
New member
Bart.......I will eventually make the comparison to the MC2301's in the studio system. Initially the MC75 amplifiers are being installed in the living room system to replace the MC452 that I traded to the dealer. I want to get some hours on the amps in the living room system and become familiar with their performance first. I have a full set of my preferred tubes (2-Gold Lion ECC83/12AX7, 4-Siemens ECC801S/12AT7, 4-Gold Lion KT88) waiting for the amps to arrive, plus I have two Wireworld Silver Electra power cords and two Furutech Flux 50's that will power the amps from a dedicated 20 amp circuit with a PS Audio Soloist Supreme SE outlet. Things are looking good for the Tuesday afternoon delivery. These MC75 amps are going to sound amazing.
Mr Peabody
Well-known member
You really have to wonder about the accuracy of the meters. That scenario just don't seem to hold up in real world listening.
My Dyn's were 6 ohm and sensitivity in the mid 80's. I bought one 60 watt stereo CJ tube amp and felt I needed more power. I eventually found another of the same amp used and had both converted to mono, at around 100 watts I was alright. Then when switching to a more efficient Revel speaker the amps just wasn't doing the trick. Maybe the F52's weren't as stable, maybe due to twice as many drivers, who knoews, but, facts are facts. A higher power solid state amp brought the F52's to life. That would be the Pass X250.
If we would only use 10 watts or less leads me to questions, like why bother building the massive power amps, why bias an amp into 20 watts class A or so if the amp would never leave Class A, on and on.
I suspect some of it is dynamics that would require power reserves and that decibels are in reality logrithmic. That still wouldn't fully account for only use 10 watts and less.
My Dyn's were 6 ohm and sensitivity in the mid 80's. I bought one 60 watt stereo CJ tube amp and felt I needed more power. I eventually found another of the same amp used and had both converted to mono, at around 100 watts I was alright. Then when switching to a more efficient Revel speaker the amps just wasn't doing the trick. Maybe the F52's weren't as stable, maybe due to twice as many drivers, who knoews, but, facts are facts. A higher power solid state amp brought the F52's to life. That would be the Pass X250.
If we would only use 10 watts or less leads me to questions, like why bother building the massive power amps, why bias an amp into 20 watts class A or so if the amp would never leave Class A, on and on.
I suspect some of it is dynamics that would require power reserves and that decibels are in reality logrithmic. That still wouldn't fully account for only use 10 watts and less.
jdandy
New member
Brian.......I understand the point you are making. There are a number of variables that impact amplifier and speaker performance, as well as volume level and dynamics. The first thing that comes to mind for me is the quality and robustness of a tube amplifier's power supply, and also the particular type of power tubes in use. If an amplifier's power supply is designed to deliver 3dB of momentary headroom over its rated power, and there aren't many amplifiers that do, the power supply would be required to momentarily deliver twice its design output capability for a very brief moment, while still maintaining its ability to deliver the continuous power rating. This is a critical point because the more robust the power supply and reserve capacitance built into the power supply is, the more likely momentary high current demands can be delivered without shortfall. What we hear is clean startling dynamics, or weak compressed dynamics. Any amplifier, and that includes high powered solid state amplifiers, can be driven to their limits, and when this takes place many irregularities show their impact on the sound. As for tube amplifiers, the type and number of power tubes that generate an amplifier's output differ with circuit designs. Some tubes cannot produce high current demands no matter what the power supply is capable of doing, while other power tubes can readily rise to momentary high current demands in stride. When driving speakers with a relatively benign impedance curve, high current reserves are not as important as when driving speakers with huge impedance swings, especially in the lowest two octaves where amplifiers deliver their highest output current. It really is a complex issue that fluctuates from one speaker/amplifier package to the next. The variables are almost infinite.
Then there is the issue of volume level and what anyone considers their normal listening level. My comments above are based on my personal listening habits, which by the way have toned themselves down quite a bit as I grow older. Lots of folks like to rock the room, and this can require additional power or not depending on the efficiency of the speakers. I once owned a pair of old Alec Voice of the Theater speakers. These speakers were 16 ohm and rated at 102dB/1W/1M. My 30 watt tube mono block McIntosh MC30 amplifiers never broke a sweat even at window rattling, furniture vibrating sound pressure levels. You commented that your Dyn's at 6 ohms had an efficiency in the mid 80 decibels (assuming 85dB). Where 1 watt would produce 102dB of sound pressure with the old Altecs, the Dyn's would require approximately 64 watts to produce that same 102dB of sound pressure. Depending on how the Dyn's impedance curve looked at the lowest frequency range the CJ amp may just not have been the right match from the beginning. If the music had 6dB of dynamic range above average music level then the most power you could safely use without clipping the amplifier would be in the range of 16 watts output in order to have enough reserve power for the 6dB peaks.
I reiterate, the variables of amplifier and speaker combinations are huge, as are the personal listening habits of all of us. What works for one may turn out to be totally wrong for the next person. I have experimented with many McIntosh amplifiers for over 50 years, both tube and solid state. One of my primary reasons for continuing to own McIntosh amplifiers is their philosophy of over-designing there amps. The MC75 is a perfect example. It uses the same power supply for its mono chassis as the MC275 stereo amp uses for both channels. I suspect this is one of the reasons so many people have said they prefer the MC75 over the MC275, and some have even said the prefer the MC75 over the MC2301 tube power amps. I can only speak from my personal experience, but I have never had issues with dynamic range. I did notice that the MC275's I owned, and I owned three of them, did give up a certain tautness to the lowest octave range that has never been an issue with my MC2301's. From what I have read the McIntosh MC75's more robust power supply on a mono chassis solves this issue completely. We shall find out soon enough.
As for the accuracy of power amplifier meters I can only repeat what McIntosh says about their meters. The manuals on amplifiers with meters states: Power Output Meter The McIntosh MC601 has a large Output Watt Meter that responds 95% full scale to a single cycle tone burst at 2kHz. Voltage and current outputs are electronically measured, multiplied and fed to a special circuit that accelerates the pointer movement in the upward direction. When the pointer reaches its peak it pauses only long enough for the human eye to perceive its position, then drops. It is almost 10 times faster than a professional VU meter. A front panel switch is provided to change the meter to the Watts Hold Mode of operation. This allows fast upward movement of the pointer but greatly increases Hold Time at the peak of its travel. The highest power output of the source material is thus recorded.
bluegrassphile
Member
- Thread Author
- #51
Extremely interesting and educational thread, if I do say so myself. There seem to be far more variables regarding minimum output power than I ever realized. I thought it pretty much came down to wpc, speaker ohms and speaker sensitivity. There's much more to it than that. Things like the quality, characteristics, and performance of the power transformer also have a lot to say about minimum power requirements. I'll probably end up choosing an amp that will almost certainly satisfy my power requirements with a good margin added to that. Once again, we'll have to see (hear) what my ears tell me.
Shadowfax
Well-known member
This does get confusing, the Harbeth specs for the Super HL5 says "From 25WPC" and then says "150 watt programme"
The general definition of Programme is
What is Watts program on a speaker?
Program Power Ratings
A speaker's “program” power rating, sometimes known as the “music” power rating, has come to mean a doubling of its continuous wattage rating. For example, a speaker rated for 400 watts continuous power would be rated for 800 watts program power.
That would mean the Continuous rec is for 25WPC to 75WPC for these speakers.
75WPC is a long way short of 500WPC so why would the MFG suggest such whimpy WPC rating if they can handle tons more?
My guess is to sell more speakers to people with small amps but also get sales from those who love more power and realize the speakers can handle it.
But then we have the debate over Good Watts vs Not so good Watts, Distortion and so on.
The general definition of Programme is
What is Watts program on a speaker?
Program Power Ratings
A speaker's “program” power rating, sometimes known as the “music” power rating, has come to mean a doubling of its continuous wattage rating. For example, a speaker rated for 400 watts continuous power would be rated for 800 watts program power.
That would mean the Continuous rec is for 25WPC to 75WPC for these speakers.
75WPC is a long way short of 500WPC so why would the MFG suggest such whimpy WPC rating if they can handle tons more?
My guess is to sell more speakers to people with small amps but also get sales from those who love more power and realize the speakers can handle it.
But then we have the debate over Good Watts vs Not so good Watts, Distortion and so on.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
Don't forget the debate about type of power amp... Class A, A/B, D, Solid State, Tube, SET, etc. 
... it will make your head spin.
If you want 500 WPC you will either have an unlimited budget or be purchasing a Class D amplifier. Many people are completely happy with "far less power", many times spending more money for that "far less power".
... it will make your head spin. If you want 500 WPC you will either have an unlimited budget or be purchasing a Class D amplifier
. Many people are completely happy with "far less power", many times spending more money for that "far less power".GSOphile
Active member
Don't forget the debate about type of power amp... Class A, A/B, D, Solid State, Tube, SET, etc.
If you want 500 WPC you will either have an unlimited budget or be purchasing a Class D amplifier
500 WPC to drive 4 ohm speakers is not too hard-to-find at a reasonable price for a class AB amp, e.g., Parasound A21+, Bryston 4B3, Gryphon Diablo 300, McIntosh 462, to name a few.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
For the averaged person (and average audiophile for that matter), $10k-$16k for an amplifier is quite high. If you consider $16,000 as reasonably price then the more power to you. I consider that rather high priced for a single audio component.
GSOphile
Active member
Two of the amps mentioned list for well under $10K. I don't think the others, the most expensive of which is an integrated with its own pre-amp function, would be only for those with an 'unlimited budget.'
Mr Peabody
Well-known member
The output tubes brought back to mind my amps had EL-34's, the Dyn Contour were stable. If I were able to use KT-120/150 they may have driven the F52's. From what I understand the output transformers help tube and Mac amps deal with impedance swings.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
Understand, and probably mis-statement saying "unlimited budget". My point is that it is amazing how fast us audiophiles lose track of how truly expensive much of the equipment is. Still, if we consider $8000 on an amplifier, hypothetically; adding the rest of the appropriate level components and you could easily be pushing $50k, $60k, $70k. Most "normal" people would think we belong in a Looney Bin paying those kind of prices for a "stereo system"...
Honestly, sometimes I agree, but I do still love my system.My co-workers think I am crazy having "ear buds" worth $2500, for example. Didn't even mention the Silver Dragon AK balanced cable
.But again, the main point is, tons of WPC at "more reasonable" prices is going to fall into the Class D category. I prefer lower powered other types of amplification.
bluegrassphile
Member
- Thread Author
- #59
Back in March of this year, after being out of high end audio for 40 some years I decided to return to the hobby I received so much enjoyment from in the '60s, '70s, and '80s. I initially thought I'd be spending maybe $5000 max. Man, was I naive?
Not that you can't get a decent sounding system for that. You certainly can. But when you start researching you begin to see what your money can buy. Then you start looking at more and more expensive and better sounding components. Sometimes it's kind of hard to set a budget and put the brakes on when you begin to exceed it. Before you know it you've spent many times more than you thought you would. Such is the hobby of high end home audio.
Not that you can't get a decent sounding system for that. You certainly can. But when you start researching you begin to see what your money can buy. Then you start looking at more and more expensive and better sounding components. Sometimes it's kind of hard to set a budget and put the brakes on when you begin to exceed it. Before you know it you've spent many times more than you thought you would. Such is the hobby of high end home audio.
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,083
Yes, you were. You thought you were going to dive right into the deep end of the high end pool, but you found that you had to walk into the wading pool.